Jenson vs Lewis - 2012 Scorecard - Part III

But this just isn't true. This year Jenson had 2 gearbox failures in Canada and the car had to be retired in Bahrain so they could change the gearbox. Add to that the change Button had to make before Suzuka and you're looking at 4 gearboxes gone for Jenson in this year alone. It's bad luck if it happens during the race but a failure is still a failure. I think that the 27 has a weak gear box, drivers have little to do with it.

At Canada the buffoons mechanics could not install the Gearboxes properly without oil leaks occurring .. there was no gearbox "failure".

But this just isn't true. This year Jenson had 2 gearbox failures in Canada and the car had to be retired in Bahrain so they could change the gearbox. Add to that the change Button had to make before Suzuka and you're looking at 4 gearboxes gone for Jenson in this year alone. It's bad luck if it happens during the race but a failure is still a failure. I think that the 27 has a weak gear box, drivers have little to do with it.

I see your point but you've actually pushed it a little too far.

Jenson had a gearbox-related problem in Canada which they failed to properly fix the first time, I don't know if they fitted any new gearboxes, I'm fairly sure they didn't fit 2.

I think it was a diff problem in Bahrain, and suspicion was that it was caused by running part of the lap on a punctured tyre.

Jenson had a gearbox-related problem in Canada which they failed to properly fix the first time, I don't know if they fitted any new gearboxes, I'm fairly sure they didn't fit 2.

I think it was a diff problem in Bahrain, and suspicion was that it was caused by running part of the lap on a punctured tyre.

Yes, it is overstated to make a point. There are no doubt mechanical reasons for those failures/ problems as I'm sure there are mechanical reasons beyond the failures in hamilton's car beyond 'driving style'. It's quite a silly discussion as obviously there are far more variables at stake then just the person behind the wheel. I seem to remember in 2008/09 that Hamilton hardly had any car problems yet poor Heiki was beset with them. Likewise, this year MSC has had terrible luck with the mechanical side of things on his car and yet he holds the joint record for most consecutive finishes so surely he can't be a car breaker.

Subtracting the ones from Jenson where we know the cause, keeping Hamilton's at his current number because we don't, and comparing the two to determine the liklihood of driver induced failure, is an unfair comparison.

Subtracting the ones from Jenson where we know the cause, keeping Hamilton's at his current number because we don't, and comparing the two to determine the liklihood of driver induced failure, is an unfair comparison.

I watched sky sports both practice session's of Canada, the story they peddled by the reporters at the time was that they had noticed oil leaks , they did not say which particular components were leaking or what caused it, there was no mention that there was any inherent "failure" of the gearbox.

The confirmation afterwards that it was a defective seal which allowed oil to escape the gearbox and into the clutch, causing clutch slip which was the initial problem noticed.

Subtracting the ones from Jenson where we know the cause, keeping Hamilton's at his current number because we don't, and comparing the two to determine the liklihood of driver induced failure, is an unfair comparison.

Subtracting the ones from Jenson where we know the cause, keeping Hamilton's at his current number because we don't, and comparing the two to determine the liklihood of driver induced failure, is an unfair comparison.

The Canada failure was in FP most probably with an old gearbox because they don't the race cycle gearbox in FP.

"McLaren are running two different set-ups on Lewis Hamilton and Jenson Button's cars. I'm not sure which is new, but I think it's Hamilton's as I've not seen that one before. Hamilton has more downforce than Button, and when you remember that Button has a five-place grid penalty it makes sense. He'll need to do more overtaking, whereas Hamilton can go for broke and try for pole position. It's good to see two different philosophies for two different cars that are going to end up in two different places on the grid."

"McLaren are running two different set-ups on Lewis Hamilton and Jenson Button's cars. I'm not sure which is new, but I think it's Hamilton's as I've not seen that one before. Hamilton has more downforce than Button, and when you remember that Button has a five-place grid penalty it makes sense. He'll need to do more overtaking, whereas Hamilton can go for broke and try for pole position. It's good to see two different philosophies for two different cars that are going to end up in two different places on the grid."

Uh-oh

Sorry but sometimes you have to question Gary Anderson, isn't this what McLaren do to get as much data as possible before settling on a general set-up before qualifying and parc ferme?

Can't speak for Senna-Prost but that's certainly not true of Hamilton-Button. Hamilton still finishes the races ahead more often than not.

Actually that was even more the case with Senna/Prost. In 1989 Prost did finish a single race in front of Senna when both were still running, that was Brazil when Senna fell to the back of the grid after a collision with Berger in the first corner.

If you consider that Hamilton out qualifies Button most of the time and yet points, podiums etc are very similar, Button must be gaining in the races.

From where I'm sitting, you're looking at the situation with blinkers on.

Is it that Button gains in the races, or that Hamilton has had more than his fair share of pits stops, mechanical issues and dnf's due to other drivers? In short, has Hamilton suffered more because of events that are out of his control, which has led to a closer points gap so far this season?

I am really looking forward to the Perez vs button next year.....I have a funny feeling its button whose performance will be measured in comparison with Perez instead of vice versa.......to be honest I can't say for sure if button will out qualify Perez next season. It really is difficult to predict. This battle will give us valuable insight in really quantifying LH supposed quali advantage

From where I'm sitting, you're looking at the situation with blinkers on.

Is it that Button gains in the races, or that Hamilton has had more than his fair share of pits stops, mechanical issues and dnf's due to other drivers? In short, has Hamilton suffered more because of events that are out of his control, which has led to a closer points gap so far this season?

Somehow I find it infinitely funny that you came out with the word 'blinkers'. You know there have actually been more seasons in Formula One than the one we have at the moment, right?

I am really looking forward to the Perez vs button next year.....I have a funny feeling its button whose performance will be measured in comparison with Perez instead of vice versa.......to be honest I can't say for sure if button will out qualify Perez next season. It really is difficult to predict. This battle will give us valuable insight in really quantifying LH supposed quali advantage

I find it ironic that you take one specific stat where Lewis clearly has a superiority over Jenson and then create a whole worldview according to which said stat is the be all and end all most important stat. Also giving us a nice flashback to the same time 3 years ago when people with similar views were expressing opinions such as "Button will make Kovalainen look good". I can only take small solace that SOME air has been left out from the inflated opinion of Lewis against Jenson during those last 3 years.

Apologies. I was under the impression that we were discussing the 2012 season. Or have I missed something?

Yes, Lazy, whom you responded to, was talking about their overall comparative performance and did not pick a segment where either one looked particulary good against the other. Otherwise we might just talk about Suzuka or India 2011 in this thread and be done with it. Because certain people very much like to focus all Button's performance on the timeframe from Barcelona to Canada this year.

Yes, Lazy, whom you responded to, was talking about their overall comparative performance and did not pick a segment where either one looked particulary good against the other. Otherwise we might just talk about Suzuka or India 2011 in this thread and be done with it. Because certain people very much like to focus all Button's performance on the timeframe from Barcelona to Canada this year.

I'm pretty sure that's all you could talk about, PB's list on the other hand.............

Actually that was even more the case with Senna/Prost. In 1989 Prost did finish a single race in front of Senna when both were still running, that was Brazil when Senna fell to the back of the grid after a collision with Berger in the first corner.

What an amazing stat, from looking at their results that year it makes me glad mechanical retirements (I assume most of them were?) play less of a role in F1 these days. Unless Senna, like Hamilton, was also a gearbox terminator...a germinator? Maybe more so now he's broken up with Nicole.

Almost double the number of DNFs to JB. In the races they are close in terms of pace, but JB is still twice as likely to be behind his teammate as he is ahead of him, assuming they both make it to the chequred flag.

If you consider that Hamilton out qualifies Button most of the time and yet points, podiums etc are very similar, Button must be gaining in the races.

See P123's post just above this one. When Hamilton finishes behind Button he tends to lose far more points than when Button finishes behind Hamilton (because if Hamilton is behind Button he has usually run into some kind of trouble whether of his making or not). That doesn't mean that Button finishes ahead as often as Hamilton does.

I'm pretty sure that's all you could talk about, PB's list on the other hand.............

About as much as the only thing you could talk about is how Jenson steers the McLaren (read Lewis) development path towards blind alley and is in general the mother of all evil all things Lewis concerned.

See P123's post just above this one. When Hamilton finishes behind Button he tends to lose far more points than when Button finishes behind Hamilton (because if Hamilton is behind Button he has usually run into some kind of trouble whether of his making or not).

Well, depending on your worldview it's then either "the whole world AND gods conspire against poor Lew" or that something may be even attributable to his general approach toward racing. Either way the scores even out more or less. Alonso and Massa - not so much, Vettel and Webber, not so much either.

About as much as the only thing you could talk about is how Jenson steers the McLaren (read Lewis) development path towards blind alley and is in general the mother of all evil all things Lewis concerned.

Still banging on about that?

As I said the last time your raised this, I didn't talk about it I merely replied to PSND post pointing out that on the evidence that existed it couldn't be 100% ruled out that Jenson may have had an effect on in season development, i even quoted you the post, to which you never responded.

Yes, Lazy, whom you responded to, was talking about their overall comparative performance and did not pick a segment where either one looked particulary good against the other. Otherwise we might just talk about Suzuka or India 2011 in this thread and be done with it.

Only there was no time frame specified. This is the 2012 thread, isn't it? Surely this is an acceptable assumption to make? Maybe I could have read back a little further?

Even if we were to discuss the whole of the last three seasons, not taking into account the circumstances surrounding each race and why certain things turned out a certain way, is still extremely blinkered in my view. My wife would look at the two numbers, the points different, listen to your conclusion and ask you were your working is? Where is the measurement of error? Where is the description of your protocols for obtaining and measuring your results?

It's an over simplistic measure, and anybody who feels that they can come to an accurate conclusion from two numbers, regardless of the time frame, is just fooling themselves.

I think that Lazy's interpretation of the points difference vs qualifying position is an ideal example of this. It's completely ignorant of any background information or explanation of his reasoning, so why should we even concern ourselves with "what is the time frame"?

Because certain people very much like to focus all Button's performance on the timeframe from Barcelona to Canada this year.

And I have seen people focus on two numbers, when it suited their purpose. The overall points comparison between Button and Hamilton, when the former had a one point advantage. "This is all I need to know" was the mantra of those like Lazy and a few others. I found it odd that when the points difference was changed in Hamilton's favour, we didn't hear these two overall scores mentioned much until after Singapore.

As I said the last time your raised this, I didn't talk about it I merely replied to PSND post pointing out that on the evidence that existed it couldn't be 100% ruled out that Jenson may have had an effect on in season development, i even quoted you the post, to which you never responded.

Would you like me to quote it again?

You merely replied to it creating a whole theory, collecting quotes, collecting anecdotal quotes, then protecting the theory to death over about 4 pages. Yeah, indeed. Every now and then you even quipped with an innocent smiley "oh it's just a theory, however -> back to lots of talk about how Jenson is to blame for everything that ever went wrong with Lewis and the speed of Mclaren". Nothing to it. Merely replied. Indeed.

See P123's post just above this one. When Hamilton finishes behind Button he tends to lose far more points than when Button finishes behind Hamilton (because if Hamilton is behind Button he has usually run into some kind of trouble whether of his making or not). That doesn't mean that Button finishes ahead as often as Hamilton does.

Yup, looking back at the Prost v Senna stats, it;s amazing how similar they are to the Jenson v Lewis stats and, as far as I can remember, for very similar reasons too.

Well, depending on your worldview it's then either "the whole world AND gods conspire against poor Lew" or that something may be even attributable to his general approach toward racing. Either way the scores even out more or less. Alonso and Massa - not so much, Vettel and Webber, not so much either.

That wasn't really my point. The point was about Button finishing ahead of Hamilton in races, and vice versa. Even though Hamilton finishes ahead most of the time the races where Button finishes ahead, whether it's the whole world and the gods, bad luck or Hamilton's errors, he usually makes up huge ground on Hamilton.

Take Hamilton's mid-season run in 2010 of Turkey, Canada, Valencia and Britain: 25 points, 25 points, 18 points and 18 points = 86. In those same four races Button scored 18 points, 18 points, 15 points and 12 points = 63. A difference of 23 points. With four normal races in which Hamilton outclassed Button each time the gap was extended by less than a race win at the end of it. Fast forward to this year and Hamilton lost 25 points in Singapore alone. Yes, Button lost 18 points in the race just before but Hamilton gained nothing from that; Singapore was a 28 point swing in favour of Button compared to Monza being an 18 point swing for Hamilton.

Even if you don't believe Hamilton has had the lion's share of misfortune in their three years together it's undeniable that Button tends to benefit from a bad Hamilton day at the office more than Hamilton benefits from a bad Button day.

You merely replied to it creating a whole theory, collecting quotes, collecting anecdotal quotes, then protecting the theory to death over about 4 pages. Yeah, indeed. Every now and then you even quipped with an innocent smiley "oh it's just a theory, however -> back to lots of talk about how Jenson is to blame for everything that ever went wrong with Lewis and the speed of Mclaren". Nothing to it. Merely replied. Indeed.

*Clap, Clap* Impressive strawman away from a previous argument.

I pulled numerous quotes from various sources including Jenson himself, and I didn't 'protect it to the death' but merely clarified and explained it to posters (mainly you) such as yourself who four months on still seem to be struggling to understand that it was a detailed response to PSND's outright denial that Button could have ever had an effect not an actual theory. While we're there however I'd like to point out that Jenson's slump (due to his own set-up path) coincided with the McLaren at it's most uncompetitive and its only when upgrades were bought later than every other team that the car became competitive.

You bring this up whenever I respond to any of your points and this late in the year it's actually quite pathetic, address the points dealt to you don't hide behind this crap.

I find it ironic that you take one specific stat where Lewis clearly has a superiority over Jenson and then create a whole worldview according to which said stat is the be all and end all most important stat. Also giving us a nice flashback to the same time 3 years ago when people with similar views were expressing opinions such as "Button will make Kovalainen look good". I can only take small solace that SOME air has been left out from the inflated opinion of Lewis against Jenson during those last 3 years.

Listen mate, I didn't mean to ruffle your feathers no need to be take it personal. I was looking at their qualification stat between each other and in no way did I mention in my post that it was quantifying anything. I just wanted to see how Perez will fare against Button next season and if this will be give an insight into LH supposed (Fastest qualifier)

Pole position is not the be all of F1 driver performance but it does play a significant role. In fact my opinion is that it plays the single largest contributing factor towards race wins.

It could be argued that qualifying is not as important as it once was with KERS, DRS and Pirelli tyres. And that is correct up to a point, but it still holds an importance. In fourteen Grands Prix so far in 2012 eight (57%) have been won from pole. If you look at DNFs of certain drivers (Most notably Vettel in Valencia and Hamilton in Singapore) the stats could be much higher and would have been about 72%.

Qualifying remains vitally important at some tracks such as Monaco where overtaking is extremely difficult. Think back to the Hungarian Grand Prix back in the summer. Hamilton qualified on pole and having kept the lead at the start was able to hold the faster Lotuses at bay to take victory.

There’s also the advantage of drivers being able to better manage their tyres in clean air, something you’re less likely to find if you haven’t qualified on pole.

The mercedes is supposedly not a very good car, at least many consider it not to be at par with the Lotuses, Bulls, MClarens and Ferraris. Yet Rosberg has managed to outqualify Button this season on 6 occassions and I believe this indirectly reflects in the result and points garnered by both drivers (Rosberg on 93 and Jenson on 119) I would expect it the gap to be slightly larger but I think the fact that Rosberg has started ahead of Button 6 occassions contributes to there being less of a gap because I believe the McLaren is definitely superior to the mercedes right now.

So Yes I made a reference to Qualifying and one lap pace but it was not a slight on Jenson. its my personal opinion that I view it as the largest single contributing factor a driver can bring to the table that gives more of an advantage towards race wins that any other thing.

So apologies if thought I was criticizing button.....my statement though referring to one lap pace was not a critic of him but rather to see how well Perez would compare as I personally believe that one lap pace is the single largest contributor towards fnishing ahead of a competitor in a car with similar performance.

Everyone, including you, know that the points are a misleading way of judging how good someone is. As shown perfectly by the last race.

How many times has Button challenged for the WDC since at McLaren? Keep in mind they had a car good enough to win a WDC twice, and Hamilton challenged in both those years.

They both "challenged" in 2010. Neither won. Hamilton took his realistic challenge ONE race further than Button and if you factor in that Button was brand new to the team that year, I'd call that a pretty close level of performance and no more than a "cherry picked" stat by you to create a misleading impression - that apparently 'annoys you' terribly when the shoe is on the other foot.

IF you are seriously counting 2012 as a challenge for Hamilton then Button's in 2011 was too. Button, after all, finished 2nd in the standings.

In pure performance terms, the BEST performances by the drivers in their 3 years together are Buttons 2011 campaign and Hamiltons 2012 campaign - I don't think there can be much doubt there. I'd give Hamilton 2012 as the best of the lot. No problem with that. But I really don't think Hamiltion's 2010 campaign is anything to be proud about if you think about it...

In pure performance terms, the BEST performances by the drivers in their 3 years together are Buttons 2011 campaign and Hamiltons 2012 campaign - I don't think there can be much doubt there. I'd give Hamilton 2012 as the best of the lot. No problem with that. But I really don't think Hamiltion's 2010 campaign is anything to be proud about if you think about it...

What on earth are you talking about? After Spa that year Hamilton had driven an almost error free season and was leading the championship, more than 30 points ahead of the eventual WDC.

They both "challenged" in 2010. Neither won. Hamilton took his realistic challenge ONE race further than Button and if you factor in that Button was brand new to the team that year, I'd call that a pretty close level of performance and no more than a "cherry picked" stat by you to create a misleading impression - that apparently 'annoys you' terribly when the shoe is on the other foot.

IF you are seriously counting 2012 as a challenge for Hamilton then Button's in 2011 was too. Button, after all, finished 2nd in the standings.

In pure performance terms, the BEST performances by the drivers in their 3 years together are Buttons 2011 campaign and Hamiltons 2012 campaign - I don't think there can be much doubt there. I'd give Hamilton 2012 as the best of the lot. No problem with that. But I really don't think Hamiltion's 2010 campaign is anything to be proud about if you think about it...

Button s 2011 was hardly a challenge. I doubt Vettel ever gave Button a second thought .

On the other hand Hamilton is actor-in-chief in all of Alonso's nightmares with Vettel running close second

How anybody can even argue that Button can hold a candle to Lewis is just pure fantasy in my opinion.

Its hidden in plain sight I guess.

Put it this way, 90% of pro-Hamilton posts focus on his raw pace, the fact he is the faster qualifier. 12-2 or whatever it is. He must be so much better than Button then...But qualifying doesn't account for 90% of a GP, it accounts for about 10%. Its just a component. And as you will no doubt have realised, F1 is a compromise between raw pace and race pace.F1 is a series of motor RACES where the object of the exercise is to be fast, smart, agile and there at the end to pick up points.I think some people just don't get how this "gulf in class" on a Saturday is not there on a Sunday.If you can't see it, little point explaining it, I guess.

They both "challenged" in 2010. Neither won. Hamilton took his realistic challenge ONE race further than Button and if you factor in that Button was brand new to the team that year, I'd call that a pretty close level of performance and no more than a "cherry picked" stat by you to create a misleading impression - that apparently 'annoys you' terribly when the shoe is on the other foot.

IF you are seriously counting 2012 as a challenge for Hamilton then Button's in 2011 was too. Button, after all, finished 2nd in the standings.

In pure performance terms, the BEST performances by the drivers in their 3 years together are Buttons 2011 campaign and Hamiltons 2012 campaign - I don't think there can be much doubt there. I'd give Hamilton 2012 as the best of the lot. No problem with that. But I really don't think Hamiltion's 2010 campaign is anything to be proud about if you think about it...

Hamilton was a contender throughout the season and led the championship in later stages. Jenson was never in contention after China - Ferrari and RBR considered Hamilton to be the threat at McLaren; the only times Jenson truly beat Hamilton on pace in 2010 was when there were changing conditions (Australia, China) or when Lewis crashed out (Singapore, Malaysia) and had mechanical problems (Hungary, Suzuka, Spain).

Lewis's 2010 season is definitely underrated; he drove with 2012 levels of consistency for most of the time - unfortunately, the car was not fast enough in the later stages.

All the BS about JB not being able to drive the car because he can't adapt could be spun another way. It is all about the reference point for the team as regards to how the car is driven. What if it was the other way around?

What if the engineers reference for how much energy was put in to the tryes was never compatible with other drivers?

What if LH's distinctive driving style was hampering development (unbeknown to the engineers) as the only reference the engineers had to work from in terms of driver input for the last 5yrs was LH?

Who is to say the 2013 McLaren is not going to be even better than the 2012?

Just throwing it out there and awaiting hysterical comments from the unreasonable...

Its also laughable that Button can't develop set up to overcome balance problems when he's just evidentially don't just that emphatically, from his doldrums in Canada to his emphatic win in Belgium.